i look at it and remember j.r.'s mantra, don't forgive, never forget and do unto others before they do unto you. they don't make baddies like j.r. any more, they don't make many actors like larry hagman compromise with republicans on taxes and spending. an identical 72% want republicans to do the same. compromise with the other side. as for what compromise should entail, 67%, more than two and

three favor a mix of spending cuts and tax increases. that's what they say real progress would look like. keeping them honest, though, real progress is one thing, washington progress is another. so far at least we're seeing much more of the second than the first. we're getting late new word that any progress might be stalled. more on that shortly. republican lawmakers standing up in a limited way to a beltway power broker named grover norquist over the 1980s era pledge, he pressures them to sign, promising not to raise taxes. any taxes. ever. >> i'm not obligated on the pledge, i made tennessee ans aware i am honoring the oath i take when i'm sworn in this january. >> that's one of the handful of republican lawmakers repudiating the pledge. he joins us shortly. i'll ask him to be more specific about whether that means higher

tax rates for high incomes are on the table. something president obama campaigned and won re-election on. senator lindsey graham also breaking with norquist says no on higher tax rates, but is open to more tax revenue by limiting deductions. >> i will violate the pledge long story short for the good of the country only if democrats will do entitlement reform. >> another lawmaker who's breaking with the norquist agrees. >> i think everything should be on the table. i myself am opposed to tax increases, i'm not going to prejudge it, we should not be taking iron clad positions. >> late today in the situation room, republican kevin mccarthy, the house majority whip put a fresh spin on what seems to be the talking points. >> if the goal is to raise more revenue, what is the best way to do that? at the same time protecting the economy? if you're able to gain more revenue by closing special loopholes, and limiting them.

and keeping the rate down, so you have better ground control, isn't that a better outcome. >> talk of tax deductions and closing loopholes. a big note on raising tax rates. a lost talk but perhaps not real movement at least for now. as for grover norquist, he told soledad o'brien today, although some republicans are discussing impure thoughts on television, they won't really act on them. >> i've had long conversations with lindsey graham and he says i would raise taxes if, then he lists this incredible list of reforms and entitlements that the democrats would never give him. as i suggested to him, senator, you're offering to trade a tax increase for a pink unicorn that doesn't exist. >> whether he does or doesn't bend on taxes, pundits here in washington seem terribly impressed that senator graham and others are talking about going against grover norquist. keeping them honest, though,

outside the beltway, most people don't know grover norquist from grover on "sesame street." standing up to a lobbyist, even a powerful one, is only washington progress, not real progress. first step, maybe even a necessary one. but only that, so is going on sunday talk shows as both republicans and democrats are doing. and talking about flexibility. >> let the rates go up to 39. let us also take a look at the deductions. let's make sure that revenue is an integral part of deficit deduction. and, yes, from my side of the table, bring entitlement reform into the conversation. >> so far, senator durbin has limited company among some fellow democrats. keeping them honest during the last budget showdown, both sides talked like this, but then they backed away. also as we mentioned a moment ago, there are late new signs that nobody's quite ready to cut a deal. another round of white house talks between congressional leaders and president obama was promised but is yet to materialize. a senate democratic leadership

aide telling us that staff level meetings meant to lay the groundwork haven't been productive. one senate republican leadership aid accuses democrats of leaking details in order to portray republicans negatively. but the aide notes that the talks are continuing, which itself can be read as some sort of progress. whether that's real progress or washington progress, remains to be seen. a lot to talk about starting with tennessee republican senator bob corker. senator corker, thanks very much for joining us. let's talk about grover norquist. no new taxes pledged. you said earlier in your career, you told cbs morning news earlier today, and i'm quoting now, you said you're not obligated on the pledge, adding the only thing i'm honoring is the oath that i take when i'm sworn in this january. so what exactly did you mean by that? did you suggest -- did you mean that under certain circumstances you would be ready to accept an

increase in tax rates for the wealthy? >> well, i was just elected as you know, re-elected. and our campaign materials during the campaign spelled out that the only pledge i would be honoring would be the pledge of the oath of office that you make when you're sworn in. that's what my comments meant. i think republicans had shown a willingness to look at revenues as long as we have entitlement reform. i think those are the two ends of the spectrum. and it appears to me that speaker boehner has been shown flexibility in revenues and it appears to me the president has shown flexibility on entitlements. and the point of my op ed this morning was look, it's so much easier for us to go ahead and make these decisions and put them behind us and start the new year with economic growth having dealt with these issues than it is to negotiate some process where we kick the can down the road and deal with this six months from now with a more

limited menu and more draconian steps, because we've dug a deeper hole. >> you're talking about capping deductions let's say at 30,000 or $50,000 per household, but what if the democrats insist and say they're not going to sign any deal unless there's at least some increase in the marginal rate for the wealthy. people making $250,000 a year. right now they're paying 35%. it was 39.6% as you remember, during the clinton administration. what if they insist it's got to go up to 37%. is that acceptable under any circumstances? >> i think the two most important people in these negotiations, and i think you would agree, are speaker boehner and the president. that's a negotiation that needed to have -- obviously speaker boehner for a bill to pass, it has to pass the house. what i've attempted to do is show that there's a way of getting revenues that we need to solve this problem. as long as it is accompanied

with entitlement reforms. there's a way of doing that without increasing rates. if people just want to draw a line in the san and say it's my way or the highway, that may be problematic. i've tried to lay out a bill as the op ed in the washington post that deals with the issues, deals with the revenues that democrats want to see. and candidly i think all of us know have to be there to truly deal with this issue. does it in a way that's progrowth. >> under any proposals you're making, capping deductions for richer families, richer americans, would that, according to your interpretation, be a violation of that grover norquist no new taxes pledge? >> i think a lot of people made the pledge 20 years ago, 25 years ago, 25 years ago, 15 years ago. i think they realize we're in a very critical time for our country and this issue has to be dealt with. revenues need to be a part of the component and entitlement

reform, true entitlement reform has to be there also. in order for us to put this in the rearview mirror. >> senator, leaders of both parties have suggested that major tax reform is simply not going to happen over the next few weeks before the new year. although it sounds like there could be an agreement in two steps, a down payment coming right now including revenue for closing loopholes, spending cuts. the hard stuff, though, major tax reform, put off until next year. what do you think about that? >> wolf, we know what the options are. the 112th congress has been through two dry runs already. no congress is more aware of what the options are. and certainly we can deal with some kind of tax reform next year. from the standpoint of dealing with this fiscal issue now, it's only a matter of political courage. again, no other congress has spent more time on this. we can make the decisions we need to make now.

i'm telling you, wolf, it's much easier to do that technically and write it down and pass it, than it is to try to negotiate some process that's likely to fail like the first two processes have, we're better off just going ahead and ripping the band-aid off, making the decisions we need to make and move down the road. >> senator bob corker, thanks very much for joining us. good luck. >> thank you, sir, see you later. let's bring in the political panel, gloria borger is joining us, and columnist ross doffet as well as van jones, the co-founder of rebuild the dream. even a majority of republicans in our latest poll, a majority of republicans said tax increases should be part of the fiscal cliff solution. add that to the election results, and the exit poll results, so how much do all those numbers change the political equation for the gop right now? >> it's hard to say definitively, wolf. i think it changes the equation a little bit.

but i think what's more interesting, what you're hearing from senator corker and the rest is this sort of semantic question, not arithmetic, but semantics. when is a tax increase not really a tax increase. if you don't raise the top rate, if you were talking to the senator before, but you do cap deductions, for the wealthy, does that count as a tax increase? in my book it does count as a tax increase. would republicans then be able to say, well, we didn't raise the top rate? so i think what we see going on right now is a lot of theatrics, you see some republicans in the senate, and i would argue that the house republicans are the ones we really need to hear from, because they're the most dug in on the tax question. so you hear some republicans kind of saying, you know, that's a pledge that was 20 years ago, et cetera, et cetera. bottom line, wolf, you need to have entitlement reform and those spending cuts on the table and you need to

have tax increases on the table. then they can all hold hands and jump off the cliff together. >> even though the styles that republicans are using to pedal their position right now seems to be shifting, the substance of the position seems to be pretty much the same as it's been for a long time. maybe you disagree? >> i actually disagree, i think this is a pretty big shift. gloria's right, it's been more of a shift from the senate than from the house, but for a long time you had republicans willing to say, look, we'll accept more revenue as long as it's revenue that comes from growth. you project that economic growth gives you x amount more tax revenue and so on. but that's not what bob corker and others are i sag. >> right. >> now they're willing to say, look, we'll sort of set the economic growth component aside, just do what's called static scoring, look at the amount of revenue you get, and accept that, it is a big shift.

i think it is -- corker's pretty upfront about this, it is insane, i didn't take the pledge, and so on. it would violate the letter of the norquist pledge. it is a big concession. the question is, is it a big enough concession given the stronger hand that the president has right now, i think what you're seeing right now? i think what you're seeing right now would have been the makings of a deal a year and a half ago. but the question for the white house is, you got republicans -- they have conceded this much, what else will they concede. and are you -- is it a situation where the white house's goal is saying, this is a once in a -- you know, once in a cycle, once in a generation opportunity to get republicans to raise taxes. let's see how much revenue we can extract. >> and you know that in exchange for the republicans biting the bullet, they want democrats to do the same thing when it comes to entitlement spending. they want cuts, serious cuts in medicare, medicaid. will the liberal base of the democratic party go along with the president if he puts that into the deal? >> probably not.

and part of the reason is because the democrats are in such a much more commanding position. you're talking about medicare, medicaid, social security. these are programs that are popular and working. if you look at social security, cbl says this program is solvent until 2038. you have a hard time convincing ordinary people there's some big emergency there. the tax cuts for the wealthy are budget busters. you have a hard time getting ordinary people to understand why we should take a chainsaw to middle class programs that are working, that are popular. to get republicans to do something that right now they're going to have to do anyway once january 1 comes. >> what will the democrats do to bring in the republicans to convince the republicans they're really going to cut spending? >> i think the spending cuts are on the table now with regard to defense. which i think is appropriate. 75% of americans say defense should be cut. you're not going to get a 50/50 compromise here. you get a 50/50 compromise when

both sides are equal distance from the american people. the republicans right now are far from the american people. the democrats are right there. you have super majorities that say, hands off medicare, hands off social security. defense spending should be cut. i think the democrats are -- there's less pressure on democrats to give away the store here. >> gloria, correct me if i'm wrong, didn't president, when he tried that deal with john boehner, he didn't he agree to significant cuts in medicare? >> yes, did he. he did. they were almost there once before. and there are different stories about who moves a goal post in that negotiation, but i would argue, if i were the president and i were going to van, i would say, look, this president has an opportunity right now to shape the future of american budgets, you know, the blue print for the american economy and for american spending priorities for a decade to come. >> sure. >> in this particular deal.

and so if i were the president, i would say, look, it's not going to be perfect, but we really do have an opportunity here, and i have an opportunity as president of the united states to lead this country into fiscal solvency again. if each side -- we can't get what's perfect. >> but let me speak up for van. >> hold on a second, i want ross to wrap it up. >> well, i was going to say, i think i disagree completely with van on the policy, i think over the long run, if you look at the growth rate in medicare and the fact that every year you don't change social security, it gets more expensive to fix. there are deep policy reasons why entitlements should be on the table. on the politics he makes a strong case. i think he can -- the liberal base can go back to the president and say, why wouldn't you want -- yes, you have an opportunity to shape the future of american fiscal policy, why wouldn't you want to extract every last concession you could get? so i think the fact that the van jones wing of the democratic party has some political sense on their side is what makes it

hard, you know, hard to cut a deal along the lines we're seeing right now. >> everyone's going to lose at least in the short term if there's no deal. taxes are going to go for the wealthy, the middle class, everyone in the country will be paying more taxes and there will be very serious domestic spending cuts and very serious defense cuts if there's no deal. van jones, gloria borger, guys, thanks very much. let us know what you think, follow us on twitter @ac360. millions celebrated the demise of a dictator, now they're on the streets accusing his democratically elected successor of trying to become one, too. things are moving fast in egypt. we'll take you there, live.

>> announcer: you never know when, but thieves can steal your identity and turn your life upside down. >> hi. >> hi. you know, i can save you 15% today if you open up a charge card account with us. >> you just read my mind. >> announcer: just one little piece of information and they can open bogus accounts, stealing your credit, your money and ruining your reputation. that's why you need lifelock to relentlessly protect what matters most... [beeping...] helping stop crooks before your identity is attacked. and now you can have the most comprehensive identity theft protection available today... lifelock ultimate. so for protection you just can't get anywhere else, get lifelock ultimate. >> i didn't know how serious identity theft was until i lost my credit and eventually i lost my home. >> announcer: credit monitoring is not enough, because it tells you after the fact, sometimes as much as 30 days later.

with lifelock, as soon as our network spots a threat to your identity, you'll get a proactive risk alert, protecting you before you become a victim. >> identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me and it's gone away because of lifelock. >> announcer: while no one can stop all identity theft, if criminals do steal your information, lifelock will help fix it, with our $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you call lifelock now to get two full months of identity theft protection risk free. that's right, 60 days risk-free. use promo code: gethelp. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you won't pay a cent. order now and also get this shredder to keep your documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 dollar value, free. get protected now. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com to try lifelock protection risk free for a full 60 days. use promo code: gethelp.

plus get this document shredder free-- but only if you act right now. call the number on your screen now! he was the man of the hour. egypt's first democratically elected president. broker of the latest cease-fire. now he's being calls a would-be dictator, people are protesting, some are getting killed. massive crowds at the funeral of

a protester who died overnight. fatally injured during demonstrations last week against morsi's edict, putting his decisions beyond judicial review. ever since he issued it, the streets have looked like this, just like they did when millions rose to overthrow the dictator. this time, the protesters are accusing president morsi of a naked power grab. today he met with members of the highest judicial body and emerged saying his edict had been clarified. what that clarification really amounts to remains, shall we say, unclear. ressa sayah joins us now with the latest. is this a clarification or is this morsi faced with the protests we've been seeing, trying to save face while scaling back his decree?

>> well, wolf, we've spoken to the president's office throughout the day, they say their condition is clear, they're not scaling back on any on these decrees or making any concessions. they seem to be reshaping and refocusing their message. mr. morsi's message now is, with these decrees, i didn't amass sweeping dictatorial powers and my decisions are still open to review by the courts, except for the decision that has to do with the formation of the parliament and the drafting of the constitution. he says this is his way of bypassing the old remnants of the mubarak regime that wanted to derail the democratic process, he wants to save it, that message doesn't seem to be winning over the protesters, a few thousand of them behind me. it's 3:15 a.m., their numbers seem to be growing in anticipation of the 1 million man demonstration scheduled for tuesday. >> the president's office under great pressure from opposition factions and the judiciary to completely, completely reverse his decrees. are there any signs he's

actually considering doing that? >> the way things stand right now, they are not. we spoke to a top adviser, we asked him about the possibility of concessions in mounting pressure and here's what he had to say. what kind of concessions are you willing to make? >> this decision is up to the president, not for us. >> is it possible -- are you prepared to consider rescinding adjusting some of these decrees? >> decree is up to the president. without accepting it, we may have some reservations. but as a whole, we must take a step to forward, not to backward. >> that's where the impasse is, mr. morsi and his followers are

saying, we want to talk. the opposition factor saying no talks until these decrees have been rescinded, wolf. >> reza, is the president's party supposedly backing down? >> i think the only time the opposition is going to view mr. morsi and his followers is backing down is if he rescinds these decrees and that hasn't happened yet. what we also had happen on monday is the 1 million man demonstration for the muslim brotherhood. that was cancelled suddenly on monday night. they released a statement, they wanted to make sure that no one viewed this as a weakness. they essentially said they cancelled it because they were concerned about possible violence, of course. the stage was set for an explosive situation with a 1 million man demonstration to the opposition and the muslim brotherhood. now a lot of people breathing a sigh of relief that that's not going to happen. >> reza in cairo, thank you.

let's dig deeper right now, robin wright senior fellow at the woodrow wilson center in washington. robin, you don't think that president morsi was trying to create a dictatorship overnight, do you think he did go too far? what do you think he was trying to accomplish? >> he did go too far. and the timing was terrible. but the context is really important. egypt's judiciary had earlier this year had dissolved a democratically elected parliament. and there were deep fears the judiciary was moving in the next couple weeks to dissolve the assembly that was working on a new constitution. that would set egypt back to square one to create a new body to write a constitution. the process could take a year, year and a half. this is time that egypt doesn't have. there's a real interest in moving forward and creating solutions to the many problems that have been left behind by the mubarak era.

the problem throughout the region where you see changes is this deep polarization between islamist parties and secular forces and both sides being deeply afraid that the other side is going to create -- whether it's an islamic regime or try to take the countries that have undergone democratic transitions back into autocratic rule. >> steven, you say president morsi and the muslim brotherhood after spending decades being sidelined by the mubarak regime, they're terrified of losing power. yoond that, though, is there much clarity about their motives in recent days? >> there doesn't seem to be. the muslim brotherhood is motivated, it's been decades out of power, and months in power. this seems to have been a misstep, a misjudgment. the question is, what were the motivations behind it? was it as some have suggested morsi was feeling confident riding a wave of international

approval after brokering a cease-fire in the gaza operation last week? did he think that this was the time to capitalize on it, or what -- was it just simply the fact that they fear that the old regime, the old guard might try to move against them through the courts. i think it's going to become clear, certainly as many skeptics doubting his actions. it looks like we're going to be seeing that back on the streets. >> robin, you make the point that there's being a fog of transition, if you will, in egypt, a crucial point, i imagine, as far as washington is concerned being that egypt has long been a key ally in the region. here's the question. is this just growing pains of a new democracy. or is something darker and more nefarious going on? >> that will play out over the next few weeks or months. but at this stage i think it's growing pains. remember, president morsi was eight months ago an unknown engineering professor who has been elevated very quickly to

what may arguably be the most important or powerful leadership in the entire arab world. he's surprised many people, on some of his decisions in working with the israelis. during the gaza war he did not call for jihad. he did not break off relations with israel. he was a responsible broker in trying to come to a cease-fire. interestingly enough, today was the day that talks began in trying to take this fragile cease-fire into something that was more enduring. that will be a very important judge of the caliber of the man, his intentions long term and the role he'll play in the region. >> you know, it's funny, because when i was in israel, steven, last week and met with israeli officials, they were praising president morsi, they were pretty impressed by what he was doing, and trying to deliver a cease-fire between hamas and israel. what do you think about the role that he played? will the cease-fire actually last? >> that, nobody knows, i certainly don't think any questions have been resolved in

the long run in gaza. both sides have held off. both sides certainly to their supporters are claiming that they did what had to be done, but they both reserve the right to carry on doing it in the future. i think it's very, very unclear what's going to be happening in gaza. other than, i think long lasting harmony is extremely long lasting. >> quickly to you, robin, is that cease-fire going to last? >> i think there's greater potential for movement on the peace process than any time in recent history, because there's so many arab governments in the region, including particularly in egypt, that really want to focus on the broader domestic issues, whether it's 40% unemployment among young people. creating the kind of solutions that led to these issues, to the issues that led to the uprising in the first place. there's enormous pressure to look domestically, there's less interest in promoting or energizing the arab/israeli

conflict than any time that i can remember and i've been covering these conflicts since 1973. >> all right. robin wright, thanks very much. steven ferrell, thanks to you as well. a lot more happening tonight, including new and horrifying images coming out of syria, video showing the aftermath of an air strike that purportedly hit a playground full of children. it comes as the assad regime launches a new wave of attacks across the country. we'll have an update from a photojournalist who just spent eight days inside syria straight ahead on "360."

a big week on capitol hill for the u.s. ambassador, susan rice, she's about to face her toughest critics on the benghazi attacks. just ahead, which lawmakers she'll be meeting with.

a horrifying scene in syria. reports of a massacre on a playground outside damascus. we have to warn you, the images are extremely graphic, and things in syria remain ugly. opposition members who posted this video say it was made after

government planes dropped cluster bombs on a playground sunday. ten children reportedly died. they believe the attack was retaliation for the recent victory taking control of a nearby airport. cnn cannot verify the video or those claims. human rights groups estimate 140 people died today alone in syria. about 40,000 civilians have been killed since this all began. the violence now spilling over into neighboring countries as well. turkey, once an ally has turned against syria, following several deaths blamed on syrian forces. that's where freelance photo journalist robert king is tonight after spending last week inside syria and more than eight months covering the conflict. robert, you just left syria today. you say that this type of bloodshed is happening every day. that syria has become a place where people are constantly burying their children. describe what you saw.

>> well, wolf, on this time inside aleppo i was witnessing the hospital being attacked by a syrian jet fighter. it destroyed the hospital completely. doctors and nurses and assistants scrambling to dig out the wounded, dig out the dead. that was just last week. and prior to that i've seen fathers unconsolable holding their dead children, waiting for taxis. children that had their heads almost cut off from rocket attacks. i've seen hungry, hungry people. now the weather is changing and it's getting colder, and so i've seen -- the last eight months i' been covering this region,

i've seen just systematic bombings and indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians. >> is it your sense that the regime, the syrian regime was targeting the hospital, or was it just indiscriminate bombing that accidentally hit the hospital? >> well, i personally believe that it was directly targeted. the hospital had taken three to four direct hits in the last few months, and there had been a consistent pattern of bombings just around the hospital. whether it was one block to the right or one block to the left. this bomb actually was dropped precisely on a part of the hospital. the building that was hit was where the medical administrative staff was located, and also where they would sanitize and sterilize their instruments used in operations. after that bomb hit, their emergency room was completely caved in.

whoever was in there died. i think there were a few people that actually survived and were -- they broke a hole through the back wall of the hospital to help pull these people out. >> robert, the conflict in syria as you well know has been going on now for more than a year and a half. do the people you talk to while you were there, still have faith that president bashar al assad's days are numbered? >> yes, i would say so. a lot of the -- the majority of the people i speak with truly believe that assad will lose aleppo in the coming months. i think they really understand that in order to take damascus and to overthrow bashar might take a few more months than a couple. i strongly believe from what i've heard on the ground that their will to overthrow bashar is as strong as it was two years ago.

>> robert king, thanks very much. >> thank you so much, wolf. we're following other stories tonight. isha sesay joining us with a 360 bulletin. isha? >> wolf, u.s. ambassador to the u.n., susan rice, is preparing to face some of her toughest critics on the benghazi consulate attacks. she's heading to capitol hill this week to discuss the incidents with senators john mccain, lindsey graham and kelly ayotte. rice initially blamed them on protests triggered by an anti-muslim film. the man behind that movie is speaking out about the backlash for the first time. he tells "the new york times" he has no regrets. he's back in prison after violating his probation on a bank fraud conviction. new york city mayor bloomberg is asking congress for $9.8 billion to clean up the mess left behind by hurricane sandy. bloomberg says the cash is needed to pay for costs not covered by fema and insurance companies.

wolf. >> thank you. coming up we told you about a town in california mired in corruption charges that left taxpayers outraged. a town where the former police chief finagled a salary for himself of nearly half a million dollars. you won't believe what that former police chief is doing now. he wants more money from the city. we're keeping them honest, next. [ male announcer ] this is steve.

he loves risk. but whether he's climbing everest, scuba diving the great barrier reef with sharks, or jumping into the market, he goes with people he trusts, which is why he trades with a company that doesn't nickel and dime him with hidden fees. so he can worry about other things, like what the market is doing and being ready, no matter what happens, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense, from td ameritrade. now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans,

they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs every year. call today to request a free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. if you're thinking about your options, call today. when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you. a stunning twist in the casey anthony case. what investigators reportedly missed when they searched her computer. could it have changed the outcome of her murder trial? that's just ahead on "360."

another keeping them honest report tonight about a working class town in california we've

told you about before. a town where charges of corruption and fraud have left taxpayers outraged. the former police chief of belle, california make a whopping salary, almost half a million dollars a year before a corruption case brought down eight leaders in the city government who now face criminal charges. the former chief wasn't charged in the case, and believe it or not now he says he wants more money from the city and the state. he's suing to double his already large pension. that is adding major insult to injury for the city's taxpayers who ended up footing the bill for a level of alleged corruption in local government that's hard to imagine. kyung lah reports. >> reporter: a 22-year veteran of the belle police force james cochran is reminded of the corruption that crushed his town at every turn he takes. boarded up buildings and vacant homes and lots, and storefront after storefront for lease, but

nowhere is a reminder more stark than his own police station, where he says his former police chief was there for only one reason, greed. >> he was here for his personal gain. he was not here to better the community. certainly not here to better us. >> he's talking about former police chief randy adams pulling in a whopping $457,000 a year for a police force with only 30 officers, way more than top cops in neighboring los angeles, chicago or even new york. cash put in his pocket by a city manager and others who were paying themselves inflated salaries. the city manager taking home more than a million dollars. >> yeah, you! >> reporter: this was the reaction when the public found out. outrage, anger boiled over. prosecutors nabbed eight city leaders saying they used public funds like a personal piggy bank looting the working class city of millions of dollars. they face criminal corruption charges. chief randy adams wasn't charged because adams didn't directly

control the city's money but even the judge wondered in court, i don't know why he's not a defendant in this case. so where is adams today? he lives in simi valley, an upper class l.a. suburb 50 miles northwest of belle, just off of country club drive in a gated community. his five-bedroom, five bath $800,000 home overlooks a picturesque golf course. >> disgusting, and the fact he's living the lavish lifestyles on the backs of us. >> reporter: she calls adams the one who got away. >> arrogant, cocky, criminal. if i can find the dictionary where it says corrupt police chief, whatever, his picture would be on it. he's the epitome of what is wrong in it country. >> she says that because of these e-mails from 2009 exchanged between adams and angela, bell's former assistant city administrator. adams negotiating the terms of

his new job as police chief wrote, i am looking forward to seeing you and taking all of belle's money. okay, just a share of it. she replies, lol, you can take your share of the pie just like us. we will all get fat together. the salary quietly approved by the former city manager. >> my jaw drops when you see it. >> doug willmore, belle's new city manager says he still can't believe what happened and what's still happening. talking to me in the rundown city council chambers, he says walking away with that half million dollar paycheck wasn't enough. the former police chief is suing the city of bell for what city sources calculate would amount to $600,000 in severance and unused sick days. >> from this small city, this poor community, to then have it revealed, get fired and actually comes back for severance. it's incredible. it's outrageous. >> reporter: seeking severance isn't apparently enough. randy adams want more money from the state of california for his pension.

adams is also suing the state to double his pension to half a million dollars a year for the rest of his life. how? his oversized salary in belle. that was his last job. his highest-paying job, and even though he only held the position a year, he says his pension should be based on that pay. hi chief randy adams, i'm kyung lah from cnn. we caught up with randy adams in simi valley. the people of the city of bell saw you milked them for a salary that was extraordinarily high and now you're trying to do the same thing with the state. >> well, i disagree, of course, with those types of characterizations. when one day i'm able to tell my complete side of the story, i think you'll see there is a completely different side to that story. unfortunately, i can't talk at length about it, but that's the situation. >> reporter: do you think you deserve to make double what the lapd chief made? >> i've made all the comments i

can make at this time. >> reporter: adams would not elaborate on camera, i did manage to speak to his attorney by telephone, who says adams is a good cop, a lifelong public servant who does deserve to double his pension to half a million dollars a year for that one year service in bell. but the people who run california's pension system say absolutely not. what is he asking for? >> basically he's trying to double his pension from $19,000 a month, which is far surpassing almost anyone else in our system as a retiree, to about $38,000 a month. >> does he deserve $38,000 a month from the taxpayers? >> the taxpayers are outraged whenever anyone does something like trying to use fraud and deceit and hide the way in which they got paid. you don't deserve it and it's not allowed. >> reporter: a proposed decision by a state board agrees rejecting adams' appeal to increase his pension, but adams is appealing. inside his gated community he awaits a final decision.

>> kyung lah is joining us from los angeles. kyung, do people of bell believe that adams only wanted to take the police chief job for a short time so he could boost his pension? >> they believe it's two-fold. in the short term, wolf, they believe it was the inflated paycheck but in the long term absolutely. it's called spiking your pension. you just take a job to increase what the state will pay you for the rest of your life. duking the system is also what it's referred to. the state pension board also agrees and that's why they're fighting it. >> why did they pick adams for the job in the first place? >> well, it's all who you know, right? wolf, in this situation, the documents appear to show that it's who he was friends with, and that's what got him into the city of bell and that he was merely just trying to cushion that pension pay. but the people say, hey, we don't want this guy. we didn't think he was anything special, and the state agreeing with that, they believe this is a backroom deal, that's why they're also fighting it. >> what a report, thanks for doing it, kyung lah. appreciate it very, very much.

just aheading with the google searches that reportedly never made it into evidence in casey anthony's murder trial. could they have convinced the jury they murdered her 2-year-old daughter caylee.

i'm isha sesay back with another 360 bulletin. a new twist in the casey anthony case. detectives investigating the disappearance of her daughter, caylee, overlooked more than 1,200 entries on a computer in anthony's home including a google search for fool-proof

suffocation methods according to reports. anthony was acquitted in caylee's death last year. politics now and it's official, new jersey chris christie filing the papers and telling reporters that he'll be running for re-election next year. he's wildly popular in the wake of sandy, he loves the job, and sees no reason to leave it voluntarily. expect a formal announcement next month. it's time for powerball fever once again. no one hit the jackpot in saturday's $325 million drawing. the next drawing is wednesday, worth an estimated 425 million. wolf's back right after this. more identity theft. by the time this holiday season is over, an estimated 1.2 million identities may be stolen. every time you pull out your wallet, shop online or hit the road, you give thieves a chance to ruin your holiday. by the time you're done watching

this, as many as 40 more identities may be stolen. you can't be on the lookout 24/7, but lifelock can. they're relentless about protecting your identity every minute of every day. when someone tries to take over your bank accounts, drain the equity in your home, or even tries to buy a car in your name, lifelock is on guard. and with lifelock's 24/7 alerts, they contact you by text, phone or email as soon as they detect suspicious activity in their network. lifelock wants you to be protected this holiday season, so they're giving you 60 days of protection risk-free. >> my years as a prosecutor taught me that you have to be proactive to protect yourself from crime, and that's especially true of identity theft. that's why i'm a member of lifelock. >> announcer: absolutely no one protects you better than lifelock, and they stand behind their protection with the power of their $1 million service guarantee. in fact, last year, lifelock protected over two million people during the holidays.

and now they can do it for you. try lifelock's protection 60 days risk-free. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com/holidays. it only takes minutes to sign up. use promo code: holidays. order now and get a special holiday gift: a document shredder to keep sensitive documents out of the wrong hands... a $29 value, free! call the number on your screen or go online and let lifelock protect your identity for 60 days risk-free. because during the holidays, keeping your identity protected means keeping your family protected.